Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:15:08 -0700, Mark Wiebe wrote:
[clip]
> My reading of Pauli's thoughts was that putting it in unilaterally is
> undesirable, something I definitely agree with. I think with Eli doing
> the legwork of getting input and acceptance from the relevant parties,
> we should help him out as much as possible.
Yes, this was the main concern. However, reading the thread on
python-ideas, apart from the choice of the letter there does not seem to
be much resistance, especially as we have a volunteer for implementing
any changes required. :)
> Not getting this change into 1.6 makes the Cython support much more
> difficult because of their design based around the buffer protocol.
>
> Looking at the thread on python-users, I see mostly concern that the
> type be standard or have precedent elsewhere, which as an IEEE standard
> it definitely satisfies. The other question is on the chosen letter - we
> picked 'e' as 'h' was taken and it is close to 'f' and 'd', the other
> float types. If a letter change is deemed necessary, it would be good to
> get that into 1.6 as well, since this kind of change is easy now, but
> much more difficult later.
The buffer interface format string does not need to match what Numpy
internally uses (although that would be clearer), so changing that later
on, if the Python devs strongly disagree with the choice made, maybe does
not have *too* much inertia. However, it could be good to come to an
agreement soon, if possible.
Pauli
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
